4.  The applicant was born in 1956 and lives in Zagreb.
5.  On 23 October 1995 the applicant was arrested and placed in pre-trial detention on suspicion of having committed the criminal offence of espionage in connection with the Homeland war in Croatia. The applicant was arrested as a member of a larger group of eighteen persons who were all suspected of the same offence.
6.  On 24 September 1996 the General Amnesty Act (Zakon o općem oprostu) was enacted; it ordered a general amnesty in respect of all criminal offences committed in connection with the war in Croatia in the period between 17 August 1990 and 23 August 1996, save in respect of those acts which amounted to the gravest breaches of humanitarian law or to war crimes, including genocide.
7.  Pursuant to the General Amnesty Act, the criminal proceedings against the applicant were discontinued on 7 October 1996 and he was immediately released from detention.
8.  On 9 June 1998 the applicant lodged a civil action against the State in the Zagreb Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Zagrebu), seeking damages for his detention. He relied on Article 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Zakon o kaznenom postupku), which provided that anyone who had been in pre-trial detention but against whom criminal proceedings had either not been instituted or had been discontinued by a final decision was entitled to compensation.
9.  On 2 June 1999 an amendment was enacted to the Code of Criminal Procedure (Article 484(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure) which provided that no compensation was to be granted in connection with the detention of persons against whom criminal proceedings had been discontinued pursuant to a pardon or amnesty under special laws or decisions.
10.  Another amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure was enacted on 27 October 1999, specifying that Article 484(a) concerned criminal offences committed in the period between 17 August 1990 and 23 August 1996.
11.  On 28 May 2004 the Zagreb Municipal Court dismissed the applicant’s compensation claim on the ground that it had no legal basis.
12.  The applicant lodged an appeal against the above judgment with the Zagreb County Court (Županijski sud u Zagrebu) on 7 July 2004, claiming that the Zagreb Municipal Court had misinterpreted the relevant law.
13.  The Zagreb County Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal on 31 January 2006 on the ground that under Article 484(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure his compensation claim was extinguished. The relevant part of the decision reads as follows:
 “Under Article 480 [of the Code of Criminal Procedure], a person who has been detained and against whom the proceedings have been discontinued is entitled to compensation.
However, in the present case amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure (Official Gazette no. 58/1999) introduced Article 484(a), which provides that there is no ground to [award compensation] under Articles 476-484 of that Code if a pardon or amnesty has been granted under special laws or decisions.
That provision was amended by the amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure (Official Gazette no. 112/1999), in that after the word “amnesty” the further words “for criminal offences committed in the period between 17 August 1990 and 23 August 1996” were added.
These amendments excluded the application of Article 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provided for a right to compensation for persons who had been detained but against whom the proceedings had ultimately been discontinued, if the proceedings had been terminated under section 2, paragraph 2, of the General Amnesty Act, which concerned criminal offences committed in the period between 17 August 1990 and 23 August 1996.
Since at the time when the first-instance judgment was adopted the said provision, which excluded application of Article 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was in force, and since it had retroactive application, the first-instance court correctly applied the relevant law when it dismissed the claim for damages.”
14.  On 13 April 2006 the applicant lodged an appeal on points of law with the Supreme Court (Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske) complaining, inter alia, about the retroactive application of Article 484(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to his civil action, which had been lodged a year before that provision had been introduced.
15.  On 28 August 2007 the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal on points of law, reiterating the reasoning of the Zagreb County Court. The Supreme Court also added:
“The appellant is wrong when he claims that [Article 484(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure] does not foresee retroactive application of that provision. On the contrary, it has retroactive effect since it excluded application of Article 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provided for compensation for a claimant who had been granted an amnesty for offences committed in the period between 17 August 1990 and 23 August 1996, such as those with which the claimant in the present case was charged and in respect of which the criminal proceedings were discontinued. The wording of the amended Article 484(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Official Gazette no. 112/1999) leaves no doubt as to its retroactive application.”
16.  The applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) on 19 November 2007, reiterating his argument that the retroactive application of Article 484(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to his civil action, which had been lodged one year before that provision had come into force, had extinguished his right to compensation. He asked the Constitutional Court to quash the judgments of the lower courts.
17.  On 5 November 2009 the Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant’s constitutional complaint, endorsing the arguments of the lower courts. That decision was served on the applicant on 18 December 2009.